Dear Mom with the iPhone, revisit.

A couple years ago there was a post on Facebook that went viral that was completely critical of parents (mothers, in specific) who were using their iPhone while in the company of their children. I was pretty offended by this. The writer was judging mothers (me) by looking at one brief moment in their day, and he had no idea at all what they were doing with their phone. I ranted about this for days and commented every single time one of my friends (overwhelmingly MEN) shared it on Facebook. Honestly, writing this one paragraph I can feel my blood boiling again. I am often on my phone at the park and out with my kids. He's talking about me.

When the weather warmed up a couple weeks ago the kids and I started walking down to the playground. My Kindle fits in my jacket pocket, and of course I took my phone as well. My kids are all finally old enough to play on the playground without my full attention. (HALLELUJAH!)  I don't think playgrounds are meant for parents to play on. I have no desire to go down slides. I don't have to anymore. My kids have siblings to play with and the two younger kids are so incredibly social that they will happily ask (force) any other kid their age to play. (The oldest one would rather be alone in his imagination anyway.) They do not need me. In fact, they are WAY more able to play alone at the playground than at home. I sit someplace where I can see and hear them, and where they can see and hear me, and I pull out my book. On my Kindle.

Only, and here's my entire point, I recently got an iPhone 6.  The screen is plenty big enough for me to read on it without strain or issue. My Kindle and the Kindle app on my phone sync. The weather got warmer and I don't always need the jacket with pockets big enough for my Kindle. So I go to the park and I stare at my phone. I sit in my car on long waits and I stare at my phone. I stand in the aisle at walmart when my daughter takes 30 minutes (literally) to choose which $5 toy she wants and I stare at my phone. (There's no hurrying a 4 year old, and if you think I could make this go faster, without tears (mine) you'd be wrong.)

So last week Trish went on a business trip. (I swear I'm not picking on Trish. I LOVE YOU LADY!) While in the airport she posted this very nice Instagram pic:

Trying to set a good example for all the others in the airport. 😝 #businesstrip #alllllllllbymyself

A photo posted by trinicapini (@trinicapini) on Apr 13, 2015 at 7:06am PDT

And I felt a little twinge. Ok, more than one twinge. First, so jealous of that #alllllllllllbymyself hashtag. Then when I got over that, I thought, "Wait. I don't read paper books. Ever. Is this a criticism of e-books?" because frankly, there's a good bit of judgement out there of e-books. Yes, still. Don't make me go find it, just trust me.  And then I realized she's probably just referring to the people who aren't reading at all, right? And I can mostly get behind that sentiment, I mean why wouldn't you whip out a book at the airport??

Then Trish came home, and she commented that no one on the plane seemed to be reading. That people were on their phones, but probably not reading.  If this was the case, then yes, it's sad. But (scroll up if you've already forgotten) how would she know? This has been bugging me since way before her trip, it's not about HER, not really. But I am also sad that when I pull my phone out and read the exact same book I'd be reading on my Kindle, that I ALWAYS have the thought "oh that guy on Facebook is SO judging me right now... and maybe Trish is too?" And by "Trish" I mean "everyone else at the park." If I were holding a paper copy of that book, I'm sure people would think "oh look at that mom, stealing a moment from what's probably a hectic life, to get some quality reading in." Right? No really, think about it. What is your assumption if you see a mom reading a paper book somewhere? You want to know what she's reading. Your first thought is NOT "Oh, she's ignoring her child."

The world likes to talk shit about people always being on their phones. Society is so anti-social now! Always staring at devices! And I agree, many people go too far. But I try really hard to not assume what they are actually DOING on it. The kid walking to school with his face down? How do you know he's not FaceTime-ing his mom? The woman who is sending a quick text as she goes into a meeting? How do you know she's not putting out volunteer PTO fires at her kids' school? (That was me, yesterday. And yes, it WAS time sensitive, and yes, it WAS important, to entire classes of 5th graders.)  The mom on her phone at the park?

When did it become ok to decide if other parents, other people, are wasting their own time?  Sure, if there were gross neglect, if my kid were beating up some other kid, if my dog were starting fights, but if everyone is happy?  I see this All. The. Time. in the reading blogging community. Don't make me go find examples, it's there. I'm sensitive to it, because of that ridiculous Facebook post years ago. I feel irate and criticized every single time. I notice it, every time. Why on earth am I not allowed to "waste" my time reading at a park I've been to a 100 times? I've seen it. I AM enjoying the beautiful day. Or I'm using reading to forget that I'm at the park on a gross day. If I were there alone, on a pretty blanket with my iced mocha and my paper book, and had instagrammed the occasion, I'd get 100 likes.  But if I'm on my phone on the bench, doing the exact thing, it's assumed I'm on email. If I were home on my couch watching American Idol while my kids played on the swingset would anyone bat an eye?

There's no easy way to end this post. No neat way for me to close it up without sounding even more defensive. So what do you think? Do you see an unfair assumption about moms (parents) in public? Do you feel hyper aware every time you dare do something of your own? Is it just me?

Random Fridays keep on coming.

• Everyone in my family was under the weather on Sunday, which resulted in the Princess and I taking the comforters to the laundromat on Monday. She thought it was the most fun ever, except for the bit where I used my very last dollar to buy her a treat from the machine and it didn't fall. Luckily for her, the route guy showed up minutes later and retrieved it.
• This week's struggles are nothing new. The Pirate still hates school. The Princess still refuses to sleep well for two consecutive nights. I am still looking for a job. It is still winter.
• I rarely use my blog to complain, and I never call people out on Facebook. I haven't ever complained about a job or a coworker in a public arena. I especially think it's the tackiest thing in the world to talk smack about your spouse in a public place. I have recently been shocked again by a family member who repeatedly uses Facebook to criticize their spouse. Every single time, I am shocked anew. 
• That said, there are two people who I would mention here, because I find them so shockingly thoughtless. First, there's a firefighter who lives on my street (a one block dead end!) who drives WAY too fast down our street. I like to cut him slack when he's leaving because there might be a fire, but when he drives home at top speed I find it a little more annoying. The second is also a driver. I've run into this person several times in town, and while she's never cut me off, I've witnessed her cut other people off on more than one occasion. I've seen her dodge in front of people for parking spots. I've seen her drive the wrong way through open drive thrus in order to cut a corner and not drive around. You'd think this person was a teenager, but no, she's a middle aged woman. The reason I remember her so clearly is because she drives an orange pickup with the name of her business all over it. (I sure hope it's her business, it would be awful to have an employee making such a bad impression all over town!) You can bet I will never call on her, if I can help it.

What I Read This Week:

• A Good American by Alex George, for BlogHer Book Club. I didn't love it. Reviewed here.
• Little House in the Big Woods by Laura Ingalls Wilder for the Little House on the Prairie Read-a-Long. The discussion starts here, please join us!
• All He Ever Desiredby Shannon Stacey for NetGalley. I enjoyed this tremendously. Review to come. 
• Back to the Good Fortune Diner (Harlequin Superromance) by Vicki Essex, also for NetGalley. I've barely started this one.

Extreme Couponing goes too far.

I think extreme couponing is worse than just stealing your food. Seriously. What seems like a great way to save money for one person merely raises the prices for the rest of us.  At least if you steal your food you only take what you need. I hear your rebuttal now, it's "sour grapes and I should clip coupons, too!" I believe that's the extreme couponers way of justifying unethical behavior.

The way extreme couponing works, and I'm sure I'm not explaining it well, is that you buy so many multiples of an item that is both on sale and you have a coupon for, that you end up actually making money, which you then use to purchase the stuff you really need, stuff that doesn't go on sale or have coupons- like milk and fresh produce.  I'm sure there is more nuance than in this explanation, but that's the idea, right? You also split your purchases into multiple transactions to get the largest possible return on all these coupons. Now I'm all for saving a buck and (you can ask my husband), I'm the cheapest person on earth, but I am disgusted and horrified by this trend.

Here's why- if you have to buy 40 boxes of a product you haven't tried and don't know if you family would eat, as one woman did on the last episode I saw, in order to make enough money to buy your veggies, you are wasting that product.  In her case it was couscous. Let's say they didn't like it, now they have 39 more boxes.  Oh sure, they can donate it somewhere, but here's what I bet happens, I bet it sits in their pantry until it expires because they keep thinking they will try it again a different way and maybe it'll be better. And then they donate the expired food or toss it. Meanwhile, those of us who DO like couscous have to pay a higher price on ours because the store just had to pay someone to take home 40 boxes and throw them away. On that same show a family without pets had a coupon for catfood. She put in a request that the store order extra cases of this particular brand, because she need to buy a large number of packages in order to maximize her return. She filled a shopping cart with catfood for the cat she did not own.  Yes, she planned to donate the food to the local shelter (and I am happy for the shelter) but what do you think is going to happen to the price of catfood now that the store had to give away all that? I have a cat (two, actually) and if each of those packages was $7, she easily just took hundreds of dollars of product she didn't need, so she could buy a couple things she did.

I'm sure many of you are reading this and thinking how you'd love to get stuff for free and what kind of idiot (Lisa) would not?? And hey, I love free stuff! Give me a coupon for a free box of catfood and I am all over it.  Send me a coupon for half off my gallon of milk and I will be in line.  But here's the deal- we use both catfood and milk at our house. I already know I enjoy (if you will) both products.  Give me a coupon for an item I've never tasted and I will happily get my one (or two if the coupon is buy one get one free) and try it out. I will not fill my pantry with a food I might not eat for the sake of saving a buck. I would happily take a product for review that I've never tried (in fact, I'll have a software review soon and I have ads here on this very blog) but I won't do it at the expense of everyone else and I won't take an unreasonable amount.

Additionally, have you ever noticed which products have coupons? Sure, sometimes it's toilet paper or Windex, but usually it's pre-packaged processed food- like Hamburger Helper or Pop-Tarts. Yeah, we eat both those things, but we don't have a pantry full of them. In this age of obesity and couch potatoes, do we really need to eat MORE of that stuff? But Lisa, how'm I supposed to afford milk if I don't buy Hamburger Helper? Yeah, I know, times are tight. They are for me too, but it doesn't help if extreme coupon shoppers are making it worse out there.

There are some stores, like Walgreens, who have a system of Register Rewards that often lead to free items as well. For example (and I'm making this example up rather than find a flyer, but this is how it works), you buy 2 of a certain makeup brand and you get a coupon for $5 off your next purchase. Your next trip you find an item that also offers rewards and use your $5 coupon to get another reward coupon. The trick is, the rewards expire very quickly and you have to keep buying stuff to keep it up. Miss a week and you start over. You can certainly game this to maximize your return (sorry to repeat that phrase, but I'm so sick of hearing it) but here's how it's different to me- it's a system created BY Walgreens, for use AT Walgreens. You can't walk into any store with your Walgreens Register Rewards and spend them. And I've yet to hear of anyone buying three shopping carts worth of crap they don't need to get a free bag of apples.

This has also changed the way people behave when shopping for other items. It doesn't hurt to ask for a discount, no, but if the store refuses, or doesn't give you the item for less than cost, don't take it out on the store.  Give away too much for too little and you'll soon discover that your town no longer has an Ace Hardware or a Small-Town furniture store or an Independent Bookstore. You'll be buying all your food at Wal-mart because the local Grocery Mart can't compete. You won't have a bookstore or a fabric store. If you ask for more than they can give and then refuse to shop there when they can't give more, don't be surprised when it's gone. I just read that north Texas Kroger stores will no long double coupons, because they are losing money. One of my local grocery stores (not a chain) has large signs in the window that they will no longer accept any coupons printed off the internet, because of fraud. We continually hear cries of "buy local" and "buy independent" but at the same time those stores are going out of business because they are forced to compete in ways they can't. No profit= no stores.

To be clear, I don't have a problem with coupons. I don't have a problem with saving money or getting a good deal.  If you can buy all your groceries and save more than you spend I'm happy for you- if they are the groceries you'd have bought anyway.  If you find a great Groupon and get free ice cream cones for life, more power to ya. If you are a pro at spotting the free nugget day at Chik-Fil-A or the free scoop day at TCBY or whatever, that's awesome, I wish I had that ability.  My issue lies with buying bulk quantities of stuff you don't need in order to get the things that are really on your list. Or buying your 38th package of toilet paper because you needed some eggs. These are the things that drive up prices for everyone.

And don't even get me started on how I feel about getting caught in line behind someone who believes themself to be an extreme couponer...


I am an Amazon Associate. As such, any purchase you make at Amazon.com after following a link from this blog will earn me a (tiny) percentage back as income. Thanks. All content copyright Books. Lists. Life. at http://bookslistslife.blogspot.com. If you're reading this post anywhere other than there, you are reading stolen content.

Don't Judge a Book by it's Cover- or Genre (TSS)

I don't read science fiction. Oh, unless The Time Traveler's Wife counts, because then I totally do. But I don't read fantasy! Unless you count Graceling by Kristin Cashore, because I'm reading that now, or The Lord of the Rings by Tolkien, because I loved those. And I don't read thrillers, but I'd really like to read In the Woods by Tana French, which lots of people tell ms is spooky and tense and thrilling. Westerns are stupid and dusty and I'd never read those. Wait. I LOVE Lonesome Dove by Larry McMurtry! And chick lit is all about pink fluffy mindless girls who wear pointy shoes and the covers are SO embarrassing, so I definitely don't read those. Except I did love Rachel's Holiday by Marian Keyes, and while THAT cover has book pink and pointy shoes, the cover of the one I read did not.

My point? Doesn't it make me look like an idiot to claim I "don't read" specific genres? Wouldn't I be stupid to judge a book by it's cover? EVERY genre has good books, bad books, and GREAT books. Nymeth wrote a great post about why she reads and loves fantasy and many of her commenters agreed that it was silly to stereotype books. So why do people do it to romance?

Ok, yes, the covers can be bad. But how often does the cover accurately predict the contents anyway? Have we learned nothing from the Liar Controversy? There are definitely some bad romance novels out there, I'm not about to say there aren't, but just as in any genre there are also some good ones. And don't bring up the whole "romance novels are just porn for bored housewives" thing, because the people spouting that the most are the very ones who only read a romance to LOOK for that. I don't read a lot of romance novels any more, but it used to be the only thing I read and I still have some favorites and follow genre in general.

The point of this post is not to make you read a romance novel, but rather to ask why this stereotype is still allowed long after it became ok to openly read other distinct genres like science fiction (have you seen some of those covers?) and horror? Why is it shameful to read about looking for a happy ending when most of us would readily admit to wanting a happy ending of our own? Are romance novels stigmatized because women read them? Does that mean that books for women are inferior? What a slippery slope that is!

I'm sure your next thought is: well then Lisa, recommend a book to me! But I'm not going to. My goal isn't to make you go read a romance novel. It's to have you think about why you might keep stereotyping an entire genre of books based on either their cover, their title, or an experience with a badly written novel you read back in 1987.

If you're insistent on reading one, you could do worse than to ask the nice bloggers at:
The Book Smugglers (winners of TWO BBAW awards!)
Book Binge
natuschan- books, books, and more books
Babbling about Books, and More!
The Misadventures of Super Librarian

Obviously this is one of my big literary pet peeves. I react to "I don't read romances!" the same way other bloggers might react to someone hating poetry or writing in books. Next Sunday I'll share my other pet peeve, but until then, tell me what never fails to provoke you regarding books? What do you defend every time you run across it? What misconception makes you stop and leave a comment?